Tabula Rasa

[Vocenoctum]

So I picked up the prerelease, playing in the beta, will buy it and get at least the first month. (After that it depends on how I like it, obviously)

So then, anyone else in it?

(Forgot to clone though, I'm only like 11th level.)

SO far I'm liking the style and controls, defending bases isn't bad, though hopefully they add some variety at later parts.

 

[GlassJaw]

I've been reading about it on GameSpot but it didn't really sound like my cup of tea. It seems the MMO market is on the verge of getting swarmed - there are a TON of MMO's in the works or about to be released. There is no way the market can sustain them all.

 

[Felon]

I think the MMORPG market has fallen into a trap of its own design. Everyone designs their games with the same basic philosophies as to what "works", so there are no fresh approaches.

How long can folks keep trying to sell us another game where you grind your way up to the level cap doing fetch quests and kill-X-creatures quests so you can play games of PvP CTF in an endless loop? The very thing that makes RPG's appealing--surprises, open-endedness, the ability to effect changes on the world--are the very elements MMO designers don't think their games should have.

As to Tabula Rasa, I do like the idea that the battlescape will change, with the bad guys gaining territory. Of course, this is most likely going to be scripted into a perpetual stalemate where the give-and-take occurs regardless of player actions.

The character design sounds like it's not very customizable. One commando is pretty much identical to another commando. I really hate that. Why am I leveling a character just so I can be like everybody else? Just give me the character up-front, and let's go ahead and play CTF (a la Team Fortress 2).

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Funny (and accurate, IMO) review at the Escapist. Not work safe, btw.

In a nutshell, I think it's not RPG enough to satisfy those folks, and not a good enough shooter to satisfy the jerk-and-twitch crowd. There is still grinding, antisocial asshats, and the other pitfalls common to the MMO genre as well. It's a platypus; a hybrid that seems like a mish-mash of parts instead of something that just works. Game design by committee.

 

[LogicsFate]

Funny (and accurate, IMO) review at the Escapist. Not work safe, btw.

In a nutshell, I think it's not RPG enough to satisfy those folks, and not a good enough shooter to satisfy the jerk-and-twitch crowd. There is still grinding, antisocial asshats, and the other pitfalls common to the MMO genre as well. It's a platypus; a hybrid that seems like a mish-mash of parts instead of something that just works. Game design by committee.

Now that's a shame, I was in the Market for a new MMO (Wow having played itself out, and Eve being kinda boring.)

Anyone with a good opinion of TR? Any other futuristic MMOs coming out? Only one I know of is WH40K and who know when that'll be out.

 

[Felon]

Funny (and accurate, IMO) review at the Escapist. Not work safe, btw.

In a nutshell, I think it's not RPG enough to satisfy those folks, and not a good enough shooter to satisfy the jerk-and-twitch crowd. There is still grinding, antisocial asshats, and the other pitfalls common to the MMO genre as well. It's a platypus; a hybrid that seems like a mish-mash of parts instead of something that just works. Game design by committee.

Kinda like DDO, huh?

Then again, going to my previous comment, I really don't see where the conventions of an MMORPG are mutually exclusive with those of a "twitch" game, and that they appeal to two mutually-exclusive types of gamers. Again, the queue-based, "twitchless" style of play is just accepted as being what "works".

Single-player RPG's certainly haven't suffered for including reflex-based gameplay. The Elders Scrolls games, for instance. Or Jade Empire.

 

[SnowRaven]

Wow, what a bad review, IMO. Just wants to poke at the guy and genre, IMO.

Tabula Rasa has a bit of a grind, sure, because anything with levels does. There are quests that revolve around "kil 10 monsters" but they are a minority and not central to the quest lines.

I don't think the interface felt WoW at all. I'm not sure how the comparison works, except to say "it's got a chat window". The power selection was a different setup too, so not sure where that came from.

You don't get many skill points per level, and each "class selection" has the same skill selection.

That said, it's more in how you spend the points. You don't have enough to just pick all your skills and have a viable character, so not all Rangers will be identical.

He is right about the color/ look of your armor being deselected as soon as you upgrade piecemeal, but that does seem like a big deal. It wasn't hard to stick to a central color scheme though.

NPCs will defend the bases, and not all bases are attacked regularly. I don't think they're "scripted" though, so much as balanced forces and random AI resolving things. It'd mean just about any player interference would tip the scales, but not a big deal.

 

[Nylanfs]

I'm looking forward to Age of Conan myself.

 

[Troll Wizard]

I was in beta and got a couple of characters to Lvl 6-7 between resets:

1. Hate the bright non-military non-environment matching colors, doesn't make sense in a war

2. Kept getting hit behind boxes, buildings, etc. there wasn't any cover

3. The polygon/texture detail was horrible, considering how old Doom 3, BF 2, DDO, etc. are; I would have expected much better detail on high setting, but it was just crappy. If anything it looks like there were aiming for a sci-fi version of WoW. This is on a AMD Athalon 64x2 DualCore 6000, SLI Nvidia 2x8500 512 Meg Video Cards, etc. PC

4. I really dislike the MMO element of recycling/respawning encounters, and more so in a "war" environment MMO. They really should have gone with instances and required more team work to complete them. It would have had a greater "war" feel if teams went on missions and you got "campaign ribbons" or such for completing a series of missions. The respawing mobs really kill any feeling of a war for me. Battlefield 2142 set up as a MMO with the "battles/missions" as instances that upon defeat or victory completion offer alternative missions would be more appealing to me.

I admit I was one of the rare people that enjoyed DDO over WoW, EQ, or VO. I perfer running through instances adventures with party/squard/groups whatever. The respawning elements of most MMOs monster mobs really kill it for me. Grant you that the absurd magic item mart of DDO eventuallly killed it for me too. I much prefer low-power lower magic games. I doubt any game will truly cater to my taste for mean and gritty. My friends have convinced me to try Conan Online (when it releases next year) with them and its supposed to have a more tactical feel for the combat and magic is supposed to have a less dominant impact on character's power level.

 

[Vocenoctum]

2) COver did give a benefit, but remember that your "aiming" was a guideline, not a shooter style. There was a little gauge. Linkers and some other big stuff did go right through total cover sometimes for me, but otherwise total cover worked fine and partial cover was helpful, I think.

1,3,4: These are just elements of MMOs. You want color options (though camo-pattern dies would make perfect sense. A sci-fi game featuring radar on a personal level makes camo redundant), and you want it easy to load and process on a wide variety of computers.

The respawning is something that bugs me on MMO's. It's irksome in the extreme on many games. TR at least has new enemies appear somewhat "in character" such as a drop ship dropping off new troops, or whatnot. They also varied the timing somewhat, which sometimes meant you'd barely killed the guy when he'd be replaced.

More instances are always fun, though I wouldn't want to require groups too much, some of us like to solo.Guild Wars is all instance for example, except for the city safe zones. It's fine by itself, but it pulls away from the MMO flavor of having strangers running by. I'm not sure that instances would feel more "warlike" for me though, pouring troops into a battlefield makes sense.

I do dislike the death-penalty. It feels excessive in a respawning game. In GW, the death penalty is offset by the fact your enemies don't reappear, but in TR, they'll probably reappear before you even get back there, let alone reset the death penalty.

All games have something, but 20% loss to stats is too harsh IMO.

The other thing I always hate in these games is the swarm tactics. Especially when you're running somewhere to get back to a mission and suddenly you've got to handle a swarm of freaking bats. It's terribly unfun.